Tag: Dissident Right

The Revolt on the Right is actually a civil rights movement. Nobody frames it that way because the revolt is of the people that every other civil rights movement in this country has been framing as their oppressor. This is the civil rights movement that at its core is straight white men. That is the one identity that has no value in the victim identity rating system. Or rather the value is negative infinity. If you possess the three identity components of male white and straight then you can be passed over for a college spot, a scholarship, for a job, for a promotion, for an award and everyone will say it was the right decision even if you were objectively more qualified.

Now I said it was just straight white men who make up the core of the movement but it is becoming clearer that identity politics can affect other people too. Recent investigations into Ivy League admissions show that Harvard has a policy to limit Asian American applicants even if they are demonstrably more qualified than some of their other favored minority applicants. And the state of women’s sports is beginning to feel the impact of what having actual women compete against so called trans-gender women will mean. Pretty soon the actual women will be completely crowded out of the winner’s circle.

And look at the recent cases of minorities running afoul of the royal flush of identity politics, the LGBTQ hand. Normally being a black man is a pretty strong position when navigating the Hollywood landscape but Kevin Hart saw this credential trumped when he was hounded out of his Academy Awards hosting gig for having said uncomplimentary things about homosexuality in a tweet a number of years ago. And as the final one-upsmanship situation a lesbian recently was shunned by the LGBTQ community for asking the question “How are trans-women different from men?”

But what is happening is an awakening to the fact that straight white men and to various degrees other groups are being discriminated against in the name of fairness. And there isn’t a bit of fairness about it. For decades the people of this country were told that each new identity group needed to be given special consideration to make up for the disparities in wealth or power or acceptance in order to bring the country together. But rather than make the country more united it only stoked resentment and provided an industry in government oversight into every aspect of our lives. School, college, work, housing, social organizations, sports and every business and profession became the target for relentless harassment and micromanagement. At this point we’ve reached the point where freedom of religion has been trampled on to the extent that a wedding cake baker is hounded out of his own business to satisfy the spite of truly evil individuals.

I think Donald Trump’s campaign may be looked back at as the match that set off the powder keg. Awareness of the situation is growing and more and more regular people are recognizing that they are being abused by a system that’s rigged against them and isn’t fair. And they’re starting to realize that they don’t have to take it anymore.

To the mainstream media and the democrats this isn’t a civil rights movement. To them it’s just racist people showing their lack of compassion. But I think it is exactly the civil rights movement needed to bring back into balance the rights of the only people allowed to be trampled on by the identity politics cabal.

The real problem is what to call this movement. All kinds of labels have been circulated. The logic of it is basically Anti-Anti-White. Now, that is a terrible name but the sense of it is there. This is a revolt against reverse discrimination. This is a reaction to the tyranny of the affirmative action regime. This is a push for freedom from the thought police. If I was looking for a symbol that represents the spirit of who is behind this movement, I would take the character in the movie “Falling Down.” A schlub who has been trying to play by the rules all his life and finds that the game is rigged against him.

Much digital ink has been spent burying the spectre of the Alt-Right. Probably most of this is butt-covering going on trying to assure the powers that be that the individual in question is NOT of the Alt-Right and therefore not deserving of de-platforming.

Along with this interment is the surprising fact that most people (including myself) are not entirely sure what the definition and origins of the Alt-Right precisely are. I know that depending on the exact capitalization and hyphenation of the name it can be the Richard Spencer coined term for the white identitarian group that he belongs to. Other versions of this and similar expressions like Dissident Right have different emphases and appeal to different points of view.

But whatever names and whatever divisions these groups make between each other (and they certainly do that), one thing is undeniable. These were the groups that identified the real problems afflicting the United States and they were the ones who backed Donald Trump before anyone else even thought he was serious. Whatever else they are wrong about they were right about those things. To deny that is to deny the truth.

And the other thing that needs to be said and that is the central point of this post is that they along with President Trump are responsible for moving the Overton Window to the point where even the normies like me have heard the details of what the Alt-Right knew and have incorporated it into our world view. No one bothers to even dispute the platitudes of the Establishment GOP when they’re mouthed. We might give a sarcastic snort and then close the link and go to some useful website where actual thinking is going on. The Alt-Right and Donald Trump truly revealed why the right always lost. It was because our supposed leaders didn’t want to win. They just wanted the job of losing.

Now, all of this is old hat. We all know all of this. But it was hammered home to me when I was perusing an article in American Greatness by Christopher Roach entitled “The Radicalism of Conservatism, Inc.” Now it’s a very good article and it delves into the history of how the establishment right became so wrong on how to win. But reading the description of how Trump deconstructed the “illegal immigration is an act of love,” and describing establishment conservatives by saying, “that they function chiefly as the palace guard for yesterday’s liberalism” could have come directly out of a ZMan post from a year ago. What that tells me is the knowledge that the Alt-Right pioneered has been successfully dispersed into the bloodstream of the conservative body politic (if I may mangle a metaphor that far).

Whatever agreements or disagreements we may have with either the tactics or the substance of what the Alt-Right believes we have to acknowledge that they have red-pilled a significant part of the normie right. And that is without a doubt an enormous achievement. Without them maybe Clinton beats Trump and with a solid liberal majority on the Supreme Court we might now be watching as the First and Second Amendments were being effectively chloroformed.

In an earlier post I said that Angelo Codevilla’s article was sure to be interesting and depressing. And so it is. Basically he seems to concur with the Dissident Right on the point that there is no longer any going back to one America. His thesis is that the Progressives have let the genie fully out of the bottle and the Right is now radicalized to the point that there will be an unending ratcheting up of tactics on both sides. And he does not think political victory by the Right will deter the Left. They are now in the go for broke business. And of course the most apt metaphor for this situation is the Corcyran Civil War in Thucydides. There we see class warfare unleashed to its most diabolical conclusion, complete annihilation of the hated enemy down to the last man. The only ray of sunshine allowed is if Republicans win the next few elections we’ll able to convince the Progressives to peacefully divide the country into mutually exclusive populations of us and them. So the story is bleak.

Luckily I’m an optimist. I still think we may beat the bastards. But I don’t say Mr. Codevilla can’t be right. He makes a convincing case. Well, I’m still staying up for the Mid-Terms. They should be very instructive.

It’s a very long article and there are no laughs but if you are interested in a political perspective on the Resistance and what it will spawn from a very thoughtful writer of the Right you might want to read this. If you want the Cliff Notes version I’d say start prepping for the troubles.

According to our friends on the Dissident Right the answer is nothing. Fate has marked our nation with the kiss of death. We are already circling the drain and any moment the slightest hiccough will push us out of the death spiral and right into the maw of the Maelström. I have to confess, every day it gets harder and harder to believe we aren’t in the situation they describe. But for the sake of argument (and to fill out my daily allotment of blather) let’s speculate on how we could escape this death trap we find ourselves in.

And what is the greatest threat to our way of life? I would say illegal immigration. It combines an economic destabilization with the loss of national identity. Inherent with the actual flow of illegal aliens is the cultural indoctrination that tells young people that it’s wrong to favor the real citizens of this country over the gate crashers. This encourages the kind of lunacy you see in California where illegal aliens are provided all the same benefits as citizens and in some cases even greater advantage. The state has even gone to the lengths of openly defying federal law by providing protection to illegal aliens from ICE agents.

Reversing the status quo would involve enforcing sanctions against employers who allow illegal aliens to get a paycheck. It would mean deporting millions of illegals and putting in place barriers (a Wall) to keep them from returning. And it would mean prosecuting those who break the law to protect illegal aliens. This is a huge undertaking. It would cost billions of dollars and would lead to violence and maybe deaths in the areas of the country heavily occupied by illegals. But it would be very possible and the benefits would be immense. The reductions in crime, government expenditures and chaos would more than compensate society for the disruptions and conflict that would be necessary.

The second most useful initiative and for me the most ethically justified is the cessation of reverse discrimination. This includes the end of affirmative action for any and all quota-based classes of people. This would put an end to the federal, state and local mandated interference in people’s lives. It would mean that the words that Martin Luther King Jr. said about a man being judged by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin would now be in alignment with government actions. No one would be suspected of incompetence because of quota based gerrymandering. The best person would be hired for the job or given the spot in school because in most places talent is what counts. In the few instances where that is not the case mediocrity is its own punishment. But at least it will be a voluntary and free decision to be mediocre. And I don’t have a problem with that, nor should the government.

And the final thing that would restore some measure of legitimacy to the concept of this being the United States is for the Supreme Court to strike down all the many State and Federal rulings that have weakened, and in some cases, nullified the Bill of Rights. The first and second amendments are under constant attack by public and private enemies and for the most part the courts have been the worst offenders. An active originalist Supreme Court could go an awful long way in restoring our rights and punishing corporations and even State governments that have been bullying and bankrupting individuals who attempt to exercise the very clearly stated rights that as Americans we supposedly enjoy.

So, these are the three initiatives that could bring America back to a semblance of the freedom and cohesion that it once enjoyed. Could these things be done? I would say definitely. Will they? In my opinion, only if President Trump gets a mandate from the American public in the mid-terms and then wins re-election with enough coat-tails to enact legislation comfortably in the House and Senate. If he cannot legislate real change then it will never happen. Then at that point I’ll have to agree with the Dissident Right and start building my cabin in the forest. Time will tell.

The Alt-Right, Dissident Right, whatever it’s called, is replacing the Establishment Conservatives as the legitimate voice of the non-progressive citizens of the United States. These are the people who voted for Donald Trump and until he was elected their point of view was almost completely unrepresented in political and journalistic circles.

But why are the old voices in the Republican Party and the Legacy Conservative Media falling by the wayside? That’s at least easy to see. It’s because they had no clue why Donald Trump was so popular. They couldn’t (or wouldn’t) see that they were the hapless tools of the Progressives. They truly were the stupid party or at least pretended to be.

So, I’ve been thinking about what is so different about the New Right. First of all, it would be inaccurate to suppose that this is a monolithic group. They disagree tremendously about many things but specifically and especially around what the outcome of their efforts will be. And undeniably the New Right is chock full of “characters.” Trying to list their defining characteristics I came up with this list:

They recognize that we’re being played by the Left and the Controlled Opposition.

They know enough about the Left’s tactics to have at least a chance at not being steam-rolled.

They recognize that anti-white racism is an intentional and powerful tactic but that it provides the means to wake up and unite Americans against the campaign being waged against them.

They spoke up against legal and illegal immigration being used to disenfranchise the native population.

They spoke up against all the globalist tactics used to bankrupt Americans.

The know how dire the situation is.

They’re on our side.

They’re not afraid.

Looking at all these factors, what it tells me about the New Right is that they aren’t fooled into thinking the Left are their fellow Americans. They won’t be co-opted by the Left-Wing Media or Institutions. They know the Left is their enemy.

What all this says to me is that they aren’t thinking about ideological definitions and logic chopping. They’ve realized that we can’t win this war by persuading our opponents of the superior logic or morality of our position. They realize that the only way to win a fight against power politics is by using power politics. And they’ve realized that the only way to beat identity politics is with identity politics. They’re thinking about strategy and tactics for beating the leftists at their own game.

Basically, they’re not stupid.

Will they continue to be successful? Nobody knows. But what is clear is that they are the only option that even might work. But unfortunately, their definition of success differs from mine. They mostly assume that the whole system will and should blow up. They’re much braver than I am or maybe they have much less to lose. But I’m not dumb enough to think that things will get better if we play nice with the Left. That’s what got us here in the first place so I’m following the path that the New Right is blazing. I don’t agree with everything being said. And as a I mentioned, unanimity doesn’t actually exist in the New Right but the general direction is clear enough. Donald Trump is our Northern Star and we will follow him as long as he can withstand the onslaught. If he falls then we’ll be waiting for the spark to ignite the powder keg. Because it’s long been primed.

Everybody talks revolution but ZMan is talking about how you get the population to follow you there. The 1-2 punch is to delegitimize the current regime to capture the moral high ground then build your own counter culture to take advantage of the moral vacuum. That sounds right. My take is that because allows anti-white racism and openly allows a flood of illegal immigrants to disenfranchise the existing citizenry it is shown to be either imcompetent or traitorous and therefore illegitimate. And I see the way that the Overton Window has been shifting, especially in the last year or so. I think this is the way things will happen. I highly recommend this post.

In the first part of this post I was looking at the contention that a majority-minority United States would devolve into a Lebanon style multi-ethnic state where one of the tribes would dominate the other groups by threat of force. I don’t see this as necessarily inevitable. Switzerland is an example of a multi-ethnic state that doesn’t involve coercive means. I said I would discuss what things would need to be done to avoid the erasure of the America we know.

I think the biggest problem currently plaguing modern-day America is that a divisive ideology has been allowed to infest schools, colleges and other institutions. This ideology is leftism and it is inherently anti-American propaganda. It attacks all facets of traditional life. And piece by piece it has been allowed to assume the role of normalcy. And always by some twisted logic, justice and kindness are used as the excuse for injustice and oppression. So, to improve the lot of minorities and women, white men must be discriminated against by means of affirmative action. And to make sexually confused people not feel uncomfortable a wedding baker has to either be coerced into pretending he believes in same sex marriage or bankrupted and driven out of business. Confronting these things is the obvious and effective way to put a stop to the primary effects of this poisonous ideology. But it’s just as important to oppose the propaganda and proselytizing efforts that are taking place in schools and corporations. And that will require national, local and individual action. President Trump has taken the first action by appointing conservative judges to the federal courts and specifically the Supreme Court. Once these judges begin removing constitutional protection behind some of these programs like “same sex marriage” the States can make laws to eliminate some of these egregious court overreaches. And once those laws are in place local groups like PTAs and school districts can start eliminating the impact these programs have on children. At the college level it will be necessary to concentrate on the State and local colleges. The Ivy League and lesser private colleges are very heavily infested with leftists and will probably have to be avoided until they either change or go broke.

It goes without saying that some States like East and West Coast blue states will resist any reversal of these policies. It would be unrealistic to believe that just a few years will be needed to change this situation. I assume the only way for blue state residents to avoid the leftist regimes they live under would be to move to red states.

As for the demographic shift to a majority minority population, I would say that many local areas with overwhelming minority populations will go the same route as Boston did with the Irish and New York did with Eastern European Jews. People will vote in their own kind. But if this fails to bring the American Dream, they will vote for someone else who will. People coming to America are looking for the peace and prosperity they’ve heard about. If a Chinese immigrant living in the Research Triangle in North Carolina has a choice to vote for a white pro-business republican or a Chinese Occupy Wall Street socialist I think the republican has a pretty good chance of winning the vote. And if it’s a choice between a white republican and a black democrat from the inner city then I don’t think the black democrat has a chance. As for the impoverished third world refugees currently flooding the country and clogging up the welfare rolls, they need to be ejected. The simplest way to do that is cut off the social services and enforce the laws targeting employers of illegal immigrants. And in general, social benefits need to be eliminated even for legal immigrants. And finally, even legal immigration needs to be curtailed down to a trickle.

If all these ideas were pursued, it would go a long way to stabilizing this country and give us enough time to acculturate the current flood of immigrants. Will it happen? Hard to say. But it will only happen if people demand it. If we just sit back or vote in the same tired hacks, the Bushes and the Romneys, then the America we know will be replaced by a leftist nightmare where everything we believed in has been destroyed. Trump has made a good start. It’s up to all of us to keep the momentum going.

The ZMan wrote a very interesting post called, “No Easy Answers.” It’s an analysis of the consequences of large scale non-European immigration into the United States, its consequences and an opinion on the useful response that white Americans should have. I’ll critique the essential portions of the essay to show what I think is the situation. Note that I’ve cut and pasted several of his sentences together to save some space. His text is in bold face font.

“Given current immigration and fertility numbers, America will be a majority-minority country within a generation. The crisis of our age is not just how we respond to this reality, but how we come to accept it. The civic nationalists will move heaven and earth in order to avoid facing demographic reality. For the recently red-pilled, all of their efforts were based on the belief that the solution was simple. Just red-pill everyone and the problem is solved.”

I agree with this analysis and the characterization of the reactions of the civic nationalists and the newly woke dissident right.

“The possibility that liberal democracy inevitably leads to cultural suicide is unpleasant, so even the red-pilled look the other way. The fact is, another bit of that dreaded demographic reality is that what comes next cannot include the current system of governance. In a multicultural society, everyone’s primary loyalty is to their group. Liberal democracy assumes people are loyal to their narrow economic interests. In a majority-minority society, this cannot possibly work. What comes next for us is what we see in the Middle East. In every country, one group dominates the rest, imposing their idea of order on the society. Saddam controlled Iraq for his people. The Persians run Iran. The Muslims run Lebanon, where every hill and valley may as well be its own country. The rule in multi-cultural, multi-tribal societies, is that one tribe rules the rest. That’s our future. The question is which groups will come to dominate the rest and what sort of system will they impose in order to remain in charge.”

ZMan’s thesis is that in a majority-minority society the form of government will devolve into a rule by the strongest tribe. The implied condition is that the rule is enforced by the threat of military or street violence. His examples are middle-eastern dictatorships. I’m not convinced of this for a couple of reasons. One reason is the existence of places like Switzerland and Singapore where a multi-ethnic state exists in a reasonably peaceful coexistence. And secondly a case could be made that the immigration of the Irish and the Eastern and Southern Europeans during the late 19th and early 20th century was an analogous if not equivalent example of a majority-minority situation that while disrupting and modifying the United states, did not destroy the country. The American culture was attractive and strong enough to subsume the new immigrant populations and produce a changed but recognizable United States. The real difference this time is the degree to which there is a significant portion of the American people who are actively working to destroy the existing culture through anti-American and specifically anti-white activities and propaganda. It seems to me the focus of white Americans should be identifying the people and institutions actively working to destroy our people and work to destroy them instead. And the reason I think this will work is that recently there have been some successes. The Supreme Court case where the wedding baker was exonerated based on freedom of religion. The other recent Supreme Court decision that bears on this is the Ohio state law that allowed clearing the voting rolls of ineligible voters. These affirmations of the clear intent of constitutional safeguards will allow the United States to continue to function as the rational and enlightened sort of country it’s always been. And these rulings occurred even before Anthony Kennedy is replaced. Once he has been, I could see a conservative Supreme Court ending affirmative action. Now, the argument against this is that something like ending affirmative action will never be allowed to happen.

But that will be the test. If the ZMan is right then even if the whole white population is “woke,” nothing will be done to alleviate the anti-white activity. But if I’m right then with someone like Trump, a republican who’s actually on our side, we should make some headway and see some victories won. In the next part of this post I’ll try to think of concrete actions that need to be taken.

In case you didn’t know Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson are the intellectual leaders of the Right-Wing. Or to use their terminology, they are “intellectual leaders of the dark web.” I was sent this link and normally I wouldn’t click anything from the NYT but the description was so hilarious sounding I couldn’t resist. After reading it I was full of conflicting feelings. The overwhelming emotion was amazement at just how inaccurate the conclusions were. Another was anger that the NYT was once again attempting to misdirect people to useful idiots who would do the Left’s bidding. And finally was hilarity at just how ridiculous their choices were. Jordan Peterson, the man whose 12 rules of living include standing up straight and taking your pills, was somehow a right-wing Machiavelli directing the revolution like a three dimensional chess master.

What is it with these people? I mean I know the republicans are the stupid party but come on! In what alternate universe is NeverTrumper, Ben Shapiro on the cutting edge of dissident right wing thought? Give us some credit. We finally figured out the Bushes, the neo-conservatives, the Weekly Standard and the National Review were the controlled opposition. Don’t turn around and send the same group right back at us again. At least put fake moustaches on them and change their names to Jones and Smith. While they’re at it they might as well claim that JEB! has seen the light and is ready to embrace Pepe the Frog as long as Pepe renounces White Supremacy.

Kevin Williamson just found out what happens when you embrace the Left. You get shanked for your trouble. And if you can get along with your new insect overlords it means you have been bought and paid for. You’ll discover (or if you don’t then anyone who reads you will discover) that you now think just like your employer. I think folks on the right have had enough of playing nice with the left. It won’t be necessary to install a skinhead in the White House but we can stop trying to please the New York Times. Donald Trump has demonstrated that not compromising with leftists and pushing the limits works. You hear about the Overton Window but actually seeing it pushed in our direction for once is inspirational.

So don’t be tempted. The right wing is infested with crazy people. Half of the things they believe sound like gibberish. Nobody knows whose ideas will turn out to be the ones that finally defeat the Left. And maybe all of our problems go away under President Trump’s moderate administration and we never have to find out if the Alt-Right apocalypse would turn out the way they hope. So use your judgement and keep your eyes and ears open and weigh everything carefully.

But don’t let the New York Times tell you who to follow. That will lead to Bill Kristol, John McCain, Justice Kennedy and some endless war in Podunkistan.

The Dissident Right has a generous contingent of people who spend a very large amount of time discussing the JQ (Jewish question). The ZMan decided to define his stance on and explain his ambivalence toward anti-Semitism. Essentially, he doesn’t share the belief that all the world’s ills are attributable to a Jewish cabal. But by the same token he doesn’t consider those who do believe it to be literally Hitler. He makes a comparison to show how he ranks anti-Semitism in the universe of possible conditions. He asks which would you prefer as a neighbor, an anti-Semite or a methamphetamine dealer?

This is an interesting stance. He has split the difference between the Alt-Right and the Establishment GOP. I’ll explain. The Establishment GOP would alert the media that they were beginning the crusade to make the world safe from anti-Semites. On the flip side the Alt-Right would debate whether the worst offense of the Jews was engineering 9-11 or the fluorination of water.

So that’s the take. He won’t join them but he won’t spend his time attacking them. Seems reasonable. I think the point is that the Left’s stance on anti-Semitism is that it is both the greatest sin and the one they get to define. It’s like the race card. If you criticize the BLM movement because they are irrational black supremacists that use violence and arson to blackmail cities into handcuffing the police and allowing unfettered crime in black neighborhoods and the adjoining areas then you are a racist. If you think that Jewish liberals spear-head many of the movements and activities that have damaged our country or you notice that they make up a large part of the left-wing media and Hollywood then you are an anti-Semite. The funny thing is you can be an anti-Semite even if you are a conservative Jew! And so, this allows the Left to divide the Right by constantly separating off a part of the group as anti-Semitic and shaming the rest of the Right into shunning them. This recalls William Buckley declaring the John Birch Society beyond the pale. Meanwhile the Left is never required to divorce itself from BLM, Antifa or any of the really crazy types under their umbrella.

So I think the ZMan is more or less correct on this stance. You can disagree or even dislike their views but that doesn’t make it your job to police their beliefs. Just as the Left doesn’t sort out their problems between Sharia Law and Homosexuality. Basically the enemy of my enemy is not someone I have to go after just because my enemy says so.

I would say that I’m probably quite a bit less accommodating of anti-Semitism than the ZMan. Although aware that a large majority of Jewish Americans are very liberal and Democratic voters I don’t feel that they are any more or less at fault than all the other liberals and Democrats in the country. And I know of some very conservative American Jews that are fully aware of the harm the Left is causing. My next-door neighbor as a kid growing up in Brooklyn was a Sephardic Jew who had lived in Israel, served in the IDF during the early years, worked in the Italian Merchant Marine and got along in a neighborhood full of every kind of people. He was a proud American and a religious man who was friendly with his Italian American neighbors almost to a fault. So, I prefer to take people one at a time.

But by the same token I see the harm that is caused by allowing the Left to define what is allowable belief and what must be condemned. That should be up to us and anti-Semitism doesn’t need to be our overwhelming concern while currently confronted with the constant harangue from the left about “white privilege” and “transphobia.” We have more pressing concerns than “actual Hitler” jumping out from behind every “Bush.” Basically, to the Left we’re all “actual Hitler” already.